Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buraaq

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. – Joe (talk) 14:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buraaq

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no coverage of film in reliable sources. پاک آرمی زندہ باد (talk) 15:27, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 September 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:39, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are actually a number of reliable secondary sources out there about the character and the comic. If the article was to change focus, it might be more noteworthy. Additionally, this isn't even a movie. Maybe there were thoughts on doing so several years ago when the article was created, but it has been changed into a "micro-series" on YouTube, apparently, with the first episode that just came out two weeks ago. I guess you could say WP:TOOSOON if you want to limit this to the animated work as opposed to the print work, though. I think there is potential, but I certainly don't have energy to change the article and keep it up. The original author and main contributor also appears to have since been banned. Perhaps the series release will drive traffic for users interested in improving it, but I don't lean one way or another... A WP:PROD might have run its course to deletion... -2pou (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 18:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a film article that fails all the criteria of WP:NFILM. no source to demonstrate WP:GNG only a few WP:NOTNEWS hits in reliable newspapers discussing the release. --DBig Xrayᗙ 08:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.